The DemocraticWarrior thread mentioned on Friday grew so long that a new one had to be started today: Former Moderator at DU. Ask Me Anything. (The Second Horseman Rides!)
Best, and Happy Easter!
- Dave
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Friday, March 21, 2008
Former DU Mod Spills Beans at DW!
In a DemocraticWarrior thread entitled Ask Me Anything, a new member called former du mod is telling tales out of school about Skinner, Will Pitt, The MEREgistrate, and other DrUdgeries.
In fact, this brave post has inspired me to create a new blog: duWhistleblowers.
- Dave
In fact, this brave post has inspired me to create a new blog: duWhistleblowers.
- Dave
Monday, March 17, 2008
A Very Happy, Very Special Saint Patrick's Day!
If all else fails, I will retreat up the valley of Virginia, plant my flag on the Blue Ridge, rally around the Scotch-Irish of that region and make my last stand for liberty amongst a people who will never submit to British tyranny whilst there is a man left to draw a trigger.
-- George Washington, Valley Forge
March is a very special time of year for my partner, Patrick, and me.
March 1 is St. David's Day, as the link in that blog entry playfully reminded readers.
March 17 is St. Patrick's Day. Like the legend about his namesake, my Patrick is pretty adept at driving out snakes, too.
In fact, Patrick has taken on the snakes at State Street Corporation for quite some time now.
This week, State Street (NYSE: STT) will publish its proxy materials, as it has in prior years.
In 2004, Patrick forced the Board of Directors to declassify itself: Directors feel the heat, By Steven Syre, Globe Columnist | December 23, 2004, which reads, in part:
Back to State Street: The board has been recommending votes against a similar declassification proposal filed annually by one annoying shareholder for years. But the vote was close in 2003, and it finally passed this year, by a substantial margin.
Now the board has changed its mind. Perhaps directors are just acting on the expressed interest of shareholders. You think?
The shareholder who pushed the issue in the first place was Patrick Jorstad of Alexandria, Va.
Then, in 2006, the Board of Directors was forced to rescind the company's poison pill, after Patrick brought a shareholder proposal to do so (search on Jorstad).
The vote tally wasn't even close:
Votes FOR the proposal: 192,531,658
Votes AGAINST: 54,064,665
Votes ABSTAINING: 3,266,725
Votes counted as BROKER NON-VOTES: 27,354,358
Votes AGAINST: 54,064,665
Votes ABSTAINING: 3,266,725
Votes counted as BROKER NON-VOTES: 27,354,358
Gentle Reader, that thar is what could charitably be called a drubbin'.
On October 20th of that year, the Board of Directors filed two filings, announcing that they'd rescinded the poison pill, bowing to the clearly-expressed wishes of the owners.
So, this year, on the week of St. Patrick's, their proxy materials will be filed.
Now, anyone who knows anything about Boston on St. Patrick's Day knows it's a - shall we say - boisterous place on that particular box on the calendar.
General George Washington went and did Boston a major favor, by securing the orderly evacuation of British troops and British sympathizers from Boston on March 17th; he thereby gave a convenient fig leaf for drunken Brahmin trust fund brats to drink all Evacuation Day long.
Typical: mouthy Bostonians started a fight that took a Virginian to finish.
What new reforms might Patrick be bringing from Virginia to the snake's den this year?
Stay tuned.
- Dave
Sunday, March 16, 2008
William Rivers Pitt: Gag Me with a Silver Spoon, Part IV
For I say unto you in all sadness of conviction that to think great thoughts you must be heroes as well as idealists. Only when you have worked alone - when you have felt around you are a black gulf of solitude more isolating than that which surrounds the dying man, and in hope and despair have trusted to your own unshaken will - then only can you gain the secret isolated joy of the thinker, who knows that a hundred years after he is dead and forgotten men who have never heard of him will be moving to the measure of his thought - the subtle rapture of postponed power, which the world knows not because it has no external trappings, but which to his prophetic vision is more real than that which commands an army. And if this joy should not be yours, still it is only thus you can know that you have done what lay in you to do - can say that you have lived, and be ready for the end.
-- Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., one of my favorite American jurists
If you would not be forgotten, as soon as you are dead and rotten, either write things worth the reading, or do things worth the writing.
-- Benjamin Franklin, one of my favorite Founders (though I'd point out he proved the two options he outlined are not mutually exclusive)
At the hole where he went in
Red-Eye called to Wrinkle-Skin.
Hear what little Red-Eye saith:
"Nag, come up and dance with death!"
Eye to eye and head to head,
(Keep the measure, Nag.)
This shall end when one is dead;
(At thy pleasure, Nag.)
Turn for turn and twist for twist—
(Run and hide thee, Nag.)
Hah! The hooded Death has missed!
(Woe betide thee, Nag!)
-- Rudyard Kipling, whose morality tales are well worth the reading at any age; Rikki-Tikki-Tavi has always been a particular favorite of mine
In September 1996, the law firm of Pitt, Hubbard & Marshall, LLP was born. The data shown in that link is directly from the Corporations Division of the Massachusetts Commonwealth Secretary.
As shown near the bottom of that page, the three named partners were:
* Christine D. Hubbard;
* Mary T. Marshall; and
* Jane H. Pitt
For those who may be unfamiliar with Boston's Financial District, 201 Devonshire Street (the location of their law offices) is an address that ranks among the most expensive square footage in Beantown.
To help put that in context: when I worked in support of the Johnson Family of Fidelity Investments (FMRCo., to be precise), I was working out of the Fidelity headquarters location, on Devonshire Street. In fact, I was working just down the street from them, soon after Pitt, Hubbard & Marshall, LLP was born.
If you (1) scroll all the way to the bottom of the Corporations Division listing; (2) highlight ALL FILINGS; and then (3) click the View Filings button, you'll be able to see:
* A PDF of the firm's Certificate of Withdrawal, essentially dissolving the LLP, filed 04/30/2003. It bears the signatures of Jane Hanify Pitt, Christine Donelan Hubbard, and Mary T. Marshall.
* A PDF of the 2003 Annual Report for the law firm.
* A PDF of the 2002 Annual Report for the law firm.
The law firm specialized in real estate, zoning, land use, and environmental law, according to Mary T. Marshall's professional profile at - surprise, surprise! - Ropes & Gray: Mary T. Marshall, formerly a partner of Pitt Hubbard & Marshall, LLP, a law firm specializing in real estate, zoning, land use, and environmental law, joined the Real Estate Group at Ropes & Gray in 2003.
Real estate, zoning, land use, and environmental law, you say? That rings a bell.
Now, where else have I heard of a crooked Boston firm and land use issues before? Let me see. Let me see. Hmmmm...
Was it this eminent domain case in Texas, involving State Street Bank & Trust Co., as Trustee for the Resolution Trust Corporation, represented by John D. Hanify of Hanify & King (the law firm whose first named partner, the aforesaid John D. Hanify, is Wee Whining Willary's maternal uncle)?
Or maybe it was the very eye-popping tale of how John D. Hanify, Esquire and Resolution Trust Corporation reportedly behaved in the land use case of John and Rhetta Sweeney. Their astounding story, in their own words, contains a great deal of information about how the Hanify Family's connections have come into play throughout this land use case.
On a page of their website titled, THE KENNEDY CONNECTION -- "CHAPPAQUIDDICK REVISITED," they begin:
The question has come up "Why is this Federal Judge, Edward Harrington, going to such lengths to protect the lawyer John Hanify of Hanify & King in Boston, Massachusetts and his father Edward Hanify?"
Here are the facts for you to discern:
It's good to be among the top crooked lawyers in Boston, judging by the Real Estate section of the Boston Globe.
Titled, Law's Reward, it's unclear whether the author meant The Law's Reward or Cardinal Law's Reward.
After all, I'd imagine the disgraced Cardinal has a great deal of gratitude for Hanify & King, for all the fancy, fumbling footwork they did during that whole pedophile priest scandal.
Law's Reward
By Carol Beggy | June 4, 2006
The 6,388-square-foot Colonial that John D. Hanify, co-founder of the Boston law firm Hanify & King, calls home is on the market for $2.775 million. The 18-room house, which has 9 baths and 9 bedrooms, sits on about an acre on Woodbine Road in Belmont Hill. Among the things Hanify added was a regulation pitcher's mound in the backyard to help his sons with baseball practice. Marie Monahan with Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage in Belmont has the listing.
After owning the house for a number of years, Hanify built a 2,600-square-foot addition for his parents, Jane and Edward B. Hanify, to live in. Hanify's father ran the trial department at Ropes & Gray and was chief counsel to Cardinal Richard J. Cushing, Boston's former archbishop. The elder Hanify also represented Senator Edward M. Kennedy during the inquest into the death of Mary Jo Kopechne, who was killed when the senator's car went off a bridge on Chappaquiddick Island in July 1969.
Has John D. Hanify ever been disciplined?
According to the Massachusetts Bar Board of Overseers and its attorney lookup function, not yet.
My suggestion? Type in only the last name, Hanify, to gain a better idea of how many decades the Hanify Family has bullied Boston courtrooms. But to pinpoint his specific listing, here's John D. Hanify's search result.
Let's go back to the Commonwealth Secretary's Office, to look up the corporate data for the law firm of Hanify & King.
Formed on January 1, 1982, the law firm includes several notable names on its list of directors and officers. That Timothy P. O'Neill can't possibly be related to Tip. The Annual Reports and other filings are quite interesting, too.
To look up any other lawyers in this tangled knot (e.g., Hubbard, Pitt, etc.), simply return to the lawyer lookup function at the Massachusetts Bar Board of Overseers.
The practice of law is a privilege, not a birthright. So why is so little discipline being meted out in Massachusetts?
For starters, the Boston Globe is "onto them," and I expect much more on this complex story of legal complicity and duplicity, very soon.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if this story breaks bigger than the Boston FBI/US Attorney scandal. In that thorny (and related) story, U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf emerged as a true hero, exposing corrupt FBI agents and corrupt complicity and duplicity in the U.S. Attorney's Office, as well.
It's very important to remember: Before forming Hanify & King, Mr. Hanify served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts. (In fact, Hanify was "serving the public" in that role back when the infamous Winter Hill Gang and Whitey Bulger - at the center of the FBI scandal - was running loose.)
But, as I said: for starters, the Boston Globe is "onto them," and - quite often - the official investigation gets sparked by a hard-hitting investigative journalism series. Sometimes, those get sparked by reaction to a seeming one-off story, like this one:
Mass. lags in disciplining lawyers: Delays in resolving misconduct charges longer in worst cases, by Jenn Abelson, Globe Staff, April 20, 2005, p. D1, Business.
Massachusetts ranks worst in the country for resolving allegations of attorney misconduct in a timely manner, according to a report released yesterday by the Massachusetts Bar Association.
Delays are longer in the most serious cases, the report concluded, and in several instances more than eight years elapsed between the filing of a complaint and the imposition of a public sanction, such as suspension or disbarment.
"What should the public say about a system of lawyer discipline where it takes 10 years to get a bad lawyer off the street?" said Roy A. Bourgeois, chairman of the Bar Association's task force on lawyer discipline, which issued yesterday's report. "That's not right."
The report is the first significant look at the current Massachusetts bar discipline system, which has existed for more than 30 years and fields over 6,000 complaints a year. The task force blamed delays on the absence of basic requirements, such as effective time standards and a statute of limitations.
Unreasonable delays, the report said, prolong the period of uncertainty for lawyers under investigation and erode public confidence in the discipline system, which was established by the Supreme Judicial Court.
In Massachusetts, the Office of the Bar Counsel investigates and prosecutes allegations of attorney misconduct. The Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers metes out punishment.
About half of the 38 cases decided by the Board of Bar Overseers in the past two fiscal years had investigatory periods the time between the filing of a complaint and the issuance of charges of four years or longer, the report said. Several investigations took seven to eight years. Allegations that attorney Jodie Grossman misappropriated funds from an estate in the early 1990s remained under investigation for nearly 10 years.
For attorneys publicly sanctioned in 2003, it took an average of 1,046 days from the filing of the complaint to the punishment. By comparison, the national median was 408 days, and Wyoming turned around complaints resulting in public sanction in 120 days, on average.
In 2002, an attorney died while waiting for a decision on alleged misconduct that was reported in 1998 and investigated for 57 months, said Bourgeois, a Worcester attorney.
"I'm a little surprised at the delay, and I hope we can address it now that it has been identified as a problem," said Kathleen M. O'Donnell, president of the Massachusetts Bar Association. "We have to police ourselves, and we have to do it in a way that we ensure the public feels it is being listened to and that we make the process fairer for lawyers who have charges brought against them."
The task force also found significant delays even when lawyers agreed to the charges and the proposed discipline, ranging from 458 days to more than eight years. For example, 3,019 days passed between the time attorney Saul Cohen was accused of client neglect and the date in 2003 when he accepted a suspension of 366 days, Bourgeois said.
"The board will review the report and respond appropriately," said Michael Fredrickson, general counsel for the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers. Fredrickson declined to comment further.
The task force made 22 recommendations that will be presented next month to the bar association's House of Delegates and, if approved, sent to the Supreme Judicial Court for consideration. The report recommends a yearly accounting of the number and age of unresolved cases and the adoption of a statute of limitations.
Beginning to get the picture as to just how insidious the incest is in the innermost legal circle of Old Dirty Money Boston? It reminds me of how many snakes form up into a mating ball.
But all it takes is a team of real reporters and real Federal and State investigators (aided by a magistrate who thinks like a mongoose) to quell those cobras.
Wee Whining Willary is the product of a Nepotism Nest like few others in America.
Thus far, neither a life worth the writing, nor writing worth the reading.
And as for his journalism chops ...
- Dave
Saturday, March 15, 2008
William Rivers Pitt: Gag Me with a Silver Spoon, Part III
I'm a uniter, not a divider.
-- Governor George W. Bush
The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.
-- Oscar Wilde
William Rivers Pitt is indeed a uniter.
No, I'm serious. Just look at what's being said about him, after Part I of this series was published here at this blog. Just look at all the different political stripes and spots represented.
Wee Whining Willary has a unique knack for uniting people, in much the same way that his father's political patron, Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton, unites people.
Whining Whillaries are uniters!
* ConservativeCave
* DemocraticWarrior
* DUmmieFunnies
* FreeRepublic
* ProgressiveIndependent
If I've missed anyone, please let me know. Thanks to those who contacted me, privately, with links.
Ah, well. At least they're talking about him; as we all know, that's the most important thing for Wee Whining Willary.
- Dave
-- Governor George W. Bush
The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.
-- Oscar Wilde
William Rivers Pitt is indeed a uniter.
No, I'm serious. Just look at what's being said about him, after Part I of this series was published here at this blog. Just look at all the different political stripes and spots represented.
Wee Whining Willary has a unique knack for uniting people, in much the same way that his father's political patron, Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton, unites people.
Whining Whillaries are uniters!
* ConservativeCave
* DemocraticWarrior
* DUmmieFunnies
* FreeRepublic
* ProgressiveIndependent
If I've missed anyone, please let me know. Thanks to those who contacted me, privately, with links.
Ah, well. At least they're talking about him; as we all know, that's the most important thing for Wee Whining Willary.
- Dave
Happy Ides of March! Letters Patent to Little Caligulas and Little Trust Fundleroys
To Little Caesars (or is that Little Caligulas?) everywhere, Greetings and Salutations via these Letters Patent!
From the Commonwealth of Virginia, these Greetings: sic semper tyrannis! Our Great Seal contains valuable lessons for tyrannical tantrum throwers and Little Trust Fundleroys.
From the wilder West Virginia (always home for me), these Greetings: Montani semper liberi! Our Great Seal also contains valuable lessons for spoiled tyrannical trust fund brats. Born in the midst of the Civil War, and borne of our principled stand for freedom and equality, we chose to forsake the false trappings of pedigree, and broke from an original Colony - sundering ourselves from the ill-gotten gains of slavery.
Above all, these Greetings to wannabe Tyrants: Beware the Ides of March! And while you're at it: keep a weather eye on the IdesOfOctober.
- Dave
From the Commonwealth of Virginia, these Greetings: sic semper tyrannis! Our Great Seal contains valuable lessons for tyrannical tantrum throwers and Little Trust Fundleroys.
From the wilder West Virginia (always home for me), these Greetings: Montani semper liberi! Our Great Seal also contains valuable lessons for spoiled tyrannical trust fund brats. Born in the midst of the Civil War, and borne of our principled stand for freedom and equality, we chose to forsake the false trappings of pedigree, and broke from an original Colony - sundering ourselves from the ill-gotten gains of slavery.
Above all, these Greetings to wannabe Tyrants: Beware the Ides of March! And while you're at it: keep a weather eye on the IdesOfOctober.
- Dave
Friday, March 14, 2008
William Rivers Pitt: Gag Me with a Silver Spoon, Part II
Author's Note: Edited to add the quote about Little Lord CornWILLis. Please see the end of this blog entry, after my signature.
Having laid the necessary groundwork and factual framework in a very lengthy Part I, this installment will be much shorter.
A couple of readers have commented that they felt the proof of the link between Jane Hanify Pitt and the screenname Raven on Democratic Underground was not clearly established in Part I.
I appreciate the critique, and I agree.
On January 31st of this year, Wee Whining Willary posted this trust funder's tripe at DU, which was cross-posted and recycled from a piece he wrote some time ago at TruthOut.
When I was ten years old, a man attempted suicide by fire in the front seat of my mother’s car...
The adulation started pouring in, downthread, on DU; after all, that's what he lives and drinks for, right? To Will, Recommendations are a substitute for love. (You just know he has a running list of how many of his DU posts have made it to the Greatest Page.)
Downthread at Response #8, a fawning fan writes: Will - Thanks for that very moving piece. Your mother was a gem.
Ever notice how Will only deigns to respond to those who are: (a) appropriately obsequious; and (b) appropriately gullible?
Response #8 met Willary's two criteria.
He responded at #13: Still is.
(pssst...her DU screen name is Raven...she's probably down in the gardening forum... smiley face)
OK. I think that makes the connection pretty clear. But allow me to provide another pillar of support for the logic.
On February 26th of this year, Raven posted: Will Pics....this is the hairy guy and my Dad who looks like he doesn't approve!
And there's Pitt, in his rolled-up flannel shirt, scruffy, long-haired, every bit (or is that every Pitt?) the Poseur, every inch The Pittseur.
And - as his own mother notes - there's his very conservative-looking Decent Republican Gramps, who looks like he doesn't approve!
Further downthread, at Response #4, Raven/Jane Hanify Pitt writes: My father loved and raised this boy and taught him the value of ethics, decency and the value of the written word and he read poetry with him and gave him just about everything. I'm in tears now thinking about what a gift my Dad was to Will and what a gift Will was to my Dad. They would have some hell of a conversation these days!
Insofar as establishing the familial link, and the link between Jane Hanify Pitt and Raven on DU more clearly goes: I rest my case.
- Dave
From The Patriot, starring Mel Gibson as Colonel Benjamin Martin, and Heath Ledger as his son, Gabriel. Little Lord CornWILLis - descended from THE Pitts - could've tried out for the role of Cornwallis, convincingly.
MARTIN: I've just been inside the mind of a genius. Lord Cornwallis knows more about war than I could in a dozen lifetimes.
BILLINGS: Cheerful news to greet the morn.
MARTIN: His victories at Charleston and Camden were perfect, strategically, tactically, logistically. But he has a weakness.
[They all turn to Martin.]
MARTIN: Lord Cornwallis is brilliant. His weakness is that he knows it.
GABRIEL: Father?
MARTIN: Pride is his weakness.
[The men consider that.]
DELANCEY: Personally, I'd would prefer stupidity.
MARTIN: Pride will do.
Having laid the necessary groundwork and factual framework in a very lengthy Part I, this installment will be much shorter.
A couple of readers have commented that they felt the proof of the link between Jane Hanify Pitt and the screenname Raven on Democratic Underground was not clearly established in Part I.
I appreciate the critique, and I agree.
On January 31st of this year, Wee Whining Willary posted this trust funder's tripe at DU, which was cross-posted and recycled from a piece he wrote some time ago at TruthOut.
When I was ten years old, a man attempted suicide by fire in the front seat of my mother’s car...
The adulation started pouring in, downthread, on DU; after all, that's what he lives and drinks for, right? To Will, Recommendations are a substitute for love. (You just know he has a running list of how many of his DU posts have made it to the Greatest Page.)
Downthread at Response #8, a fawning fan writes: Will - Thanks for that very moving piece. Your mother was a gem.
Ever notice how Will only deigns to respond to those who are: (a) appropriately obsequious; and (b) appropriately gullible?
Response #8 met Willary's two criteria.
He responded at #13: Still is.
(pssst...her DU screen name is Raven...she's probably down in the gardening forum... smiley face)
OK. I think that makes the connection pretty clear. But allow me to provide another pillar of support for the logic.
On February 26th of this year, Raven posted: Will Pics....this is the hairy guy and my Dad who looks like he doesn't approve!
And there's Pitt, in his rolled-up flannel shirt, scruffy, long-haired, every bit (or is that every Pitt?) the Poseur, every inch The Pittseur.
And - as his own mother notes - there's his very conservative-looking Decent Republican Gramps, who looks like he doesn't approve!
Further downthread, at Response #4, Raven/Jane Hanify Pitt writes: My father loved and raised this boy and taught him the value of ethics, decency and the value of the written word and he read poetry with him and gave him just about everything. I'm in tears now thinking about what a gift my Dad was to Will and what a gift Will was to my Dad. They would have some hell of a conversation these days!
Insofar as establishing the familial link, and the link between Jane Hanify Pitt and Raven on DU more clearly goes: I rest my case.
- Dave
From The Patriot, starring Mel Gibson as Colonel Benjamin Martin, and Heath Ledger as his son, Gabriel. Little Lord CornWILLis - descended from THE Pitts - could've tried out for the role of Cornwallis, convincingly.
MARTIN: I've just been inside the mind of a genius. Lord Cornwallis knows more about war than I could in a dozen lifetimes.
BILLINGS: Cheerful news to greet the morn.
MARTIN: His victories at Charleston and Camden were perfect, strategically, tactically, logistically. But he has a weakness.
[They all turn to Martin.]
MARTIN: Lord Cornwallis is brilliant. His weakness is that he knows it.
GABRIEL: Father?
MARTIN: Pride is his weakness.
[The men consider that.]
DELANCEY: Personally, I'd would prefer stupidity.
MARTIN: Pride will do.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
William Rivers Pitt: Gag Me with a Silver Spoon, Part I
Saving is a fine thing. Especially when your parents have done it for you.
-- Sir Winston Churchill, whose extremely well-connected family, no doubt, had rooms full of heirloom silver spoons.
-- Sir Winston Churchill, whose extremely well-connected family, no doubt, had rooms full of heirloom silver spoons.
For of those to whom much is given, much is required. And when at some future date the high court of History sits in judgment on each of us, recording whether in our brief span of service we fulfilled our responsibilities to the state, our success or failure, in whatever office we hold, will be measured by the answers to four questions: First, were we truly men of courage ... Second, were we truly men of judgment ... Third, were we truly men of integrity ... Finally, were we truly men of dedication?
-- John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Speech to the Massachusetts State Legislature, January 9, 1961. His extremely well-connected family has rooms full of heirloom silver spoons, too, no doubt. And more than a few silver skeletons in the compound's closets...
... protected and hidden away, out of sight, by the late Edward B. Hanify, Esquire, William Rivers Pitt's maternal grandfather. How I came to know this is a tale that requires careful telling.
But the best man I have ever known in my life, my grandfather, was a rock-ribbed conservative Catholic Republican. He spoke with respect, argued with passionate logic, and earned the respect of his opponents.
-- William Rivers Pitt, born with a set of heirloom silver spoons in his mouth (just don't dare to ask him how the pater familias actually went about "making" the family fortune).
Author's Note: For additional revelations about this and related topics, please see DemocraticWarrior, IdesOfOctober, and ProgressiveIndependent. I know this entry is long, and complex, but the facts to be learned by progressive voters are - I hope - worth the read for the revelations.
My domestic partner and I have been pushing for much-needed reforms at State Street Corporation for more than a decade.
In fact, last month marked the 10-year anniversary of the go live date for a handcoded website I created to help agitate for those reforms; that website would now be called a blog. I think of it as a protoblog.
Yes, back in 1998, Gentle Reader, you pretty much had to know how to handcode HTML if you wanted to express yourself on this new-fangled thing called the Internet. But - as my college roommates and close college friends can attest - I was always an early adopter, and I got the potential of the Internet right away. So, I learned to handcode.
My approach to wielding this new technology was novel enough (at the time), that the Boston Globe ran an article about it, front page, top-of-the-fold, in the Business Section ... Fired Worker Pleads His Case on 'Net in Dispute with Firm: Gay Man Files Bias Complaints with Agencies, Details Saga on Web, by Steve Bailey and Steve Syre, February 18, 1998. My website, or protoblog, had gone live on Friday, February 13th, the same day that the Boston Globe called State Street for comment.
My partner and I had already been to the Globe's offices earlier that day, laying out our evidence. I'll never forget that day. Steve Bailey took us into the Globe's cafeteria, and bought us each a coffee. Earnestly, I began telling the tale, laying out the paper trail for Bailey as I went, with my partner interjecting at key points when I missed a nuance.
After about 15 minutes of listening, Bailey took a thoughtful swig of his coffee, raised his hand up, palm facing toward us, and said one word: "Stop."
For a moment, my heart sank. It must've shown on my face, because Bailey's mug became mirthful. He continued. I'm paraphrasing here, but very close to what was said:
"We've known that State Street is dirty for years. You think you're the first person who's ever brought us evidence of their financial misconduct, or mistreatment of employees, and such? Not even close. But the editors here get very skittish about writing anything critical of State Street. State Street's got the best lawyers in town, and they don't hesitate to use them the moment they catch wind of a critical piece, to try to put the kibosh on it."
OK. That was slightly better. I started to say something, but Bailey continued.
"What's great about your story is, we'd not be reporting what you've already got up on your website as being accurate. We'd be reporting it as being a story about how employees can level the playing field with the Internet, which is revolutionizing everything. The story would be about how you're telling your story, not whether the story you're telling against State Street is true. Don't get me wrong. I think it's true. It's just a good way of framing it."
OK. That was much better. I began to see where he was going with this.
"I can get this by the editors, on that angle. But I will need to call State Street for comment. Have you taken it live yet? Have they seen it?"
They had not.
Only a few trusted friends (beta testers, they might be called, today) had been given the obscure URL, so that they could give me recommendations and feedback for how to make the site better, easier to navigate, and clearer.
I'd been working on the thing for about a month before I felt it was ready to share, under embargo, with the media types, like Bailey.
Bailey pressed the point: in order to write the piece, he would need to contact State Street, and they would need to be given a full and fair opportunity to respond.
That made sense. So, we struck a deal: I would go home, and immediately notify State Street of the site's existence, and let Bailey know when I had done so. In return, he promised to call them, promptly, for comment.
In the 5 days from taking the site live (on Friday, February 13, 1998) until the first article ran (on Wednesday, February 18, 1998), there were many tense back-and-forth calls between Bailey and me. Clearly, his editors were nervous, and Bailey intimated to me that the lawyers and PR flaks for State Street were on the warpath. In order to satisfy his editorial board, Bailey sought - and I provided - additional back-up data. These calls came at some very inopportune times, and I will never forget having to try to get a clear phone signal for one especially critical call.
Finally, late on Tuesday, February 17, 1998, Bailey called, with an exultant tone to his voice: "It runs tomorrow."
My partner and I were up at the buttcrack of dawn that Wednesday. We drove into Harvard Square, and popped over to a landmark: the Out of Town News (OOTN) newstand. Because I used to deliver local and national papers to the Law School dorms for The Harvard Crimson (as just one of the jobs I worked to put myself through college), I happened to know that OOTN got a very early paper drop-off from the Globe's morning distribution network. If my own paper run's drop from The Crimson was missing or short, I could always pop over to OOTN and load up my bags there.
Oh! The sound and the fury! Oh! The sturm and the drang!
The State Street Bank Brass were not amused by the article's appearance that morning. Their lawyers, working bilkable hours, are paid handsomely - with the shareholders' coin - to match their masters' mood.
On the legal front, all hell broke loose.
But something else happened, too. Something I had dared to hope would happen, in fact. But it happened to a far greater degree and extent than I could've hoped for in my wildest wishes or fondest dreams.
My voicemail and my e-mail Inbox began overflowing: not just with words of support (from all over the world, in fact), and not just with flames (which were often amusing to read); but also, the very morning the article was published (and continuing into the present) I began receiving information from others who had information about serious misconduct at State Street.
In other words, my hunch (reinforced by Bailey's words about "knowing for years" that "State Street is crooked") was right: I was not alone. And there were others who wanted to know if I could help get their stories out there, too.
*****
Well, we'd be here all day and into next year if I tried to capture all the ins and outs that have transpired since the story went public.
But salient to today's blog entry, however, is this: State Street was so worried when I subsequently sued them in Federal Court in 2000, that they sent five attorneys, from two separate law firms, to a hearing on their dismissal motion. Of those, two were partners at Ropes & Gray, one of whom I had never before met: Robert F. Hayes, Esquire. The other four lawyers, I had already encountered before that day's hearing.
So, naturally, Hayes' presence intrigued me. Who was he, and why was he there in court?
Today, Hayes is listed as being of counsel at Ropes & Gray. But until recently, he was the "venerable" firm's go-to-guy on corporation and securities law.
Think they might've been nervous about what I had to tell the Court?
After the motion hearing was over, I made it a priority to begin learning as much as possible about Robert F. Hayes, Esquire.
In the course of my partner's and my research wanderings, it came to our attention that Bobby Hayes had been part of Senator Kennedy's Chappaquiddick defense dream team. One day, I was tooling around LEXIS/NEXIS, and decided to do a search of all the cases in which Hayes' name appeared in the headnotes, as counsel of record.
By this time, it was hard to make my jaw drop at anything involving Ropes & Gray. But that made my jaw drop. The mysterious lawyer who had taken my partner and me on at several key points, including me at that motion hearing, was such a legal eagle as to have been handpicked for that case?
As a student of History, and as a student of the complexities of the Kennedy Family Legacy, I was more than intrigued. I mean, for crying out loud! State Street's public statements to the press tried to make it appear that I was nothing more than a nuisance; yet, here State Street was in Court, using a big gun like Hayes to thwart my efforts to bring their misconduct to light? Uh-huh. Yeah, right: just a nuisance.
But then my eye fell on the lead Chappaquiddick defense counselor's name: Edward B. Hanify, Esquire.
Immediately, the synaptic pathways made the connection: Edward B. Hanify, the Ropes & Gray partner who sat on State Street's Board of Directors since the company went public in 1969, until he was replaced in that seat with yet another Ropes & Gray partner, Truman Snell Casner?
That Edward B. Hanify!?! The Edward B. Hanify whose Harvard Law School obituary read:
Edward B. Hanify '36 of Belmont, Mass., died December 31, 2000. He was a retired partner at Ropes & Gray in Boston. He was a member of President Johnson's National Advisory Council on the Education of Disadvantaged Children and an appointee of President Kennedy to the board of visitors at the U.S. Military Academy. In 1969 Hanify was credited with developing Senator Edward Kennedy's legal strategy in the inquest into the death of Mary Jo Kopechne. He served as director of New England Telephone, AT&T, John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance, State Street Bank, and Boston Edison, and as trustee, secretary, and director of the Kennedy Library Foundation. Hanify was a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy during WWII.
The Edward B. Hanify whose son, John D. Hanify, is a named, founding partner at Hanify & King, another crooked Boston law firm.
You know? Hanify & King? You know: the law firm for the BushCo./BFEE creation, The Resolution Trust Corporation?
Come on! Everyone who's anyone in Boston Brahmin Circles knows John D. Hanify. I mean, not only is this guy Edward B. Hanify's son, folks. Among other things:
Before forming Hanify & King, Mr. Hanify served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts. He represented the Justice Department in the litigation of the constitutionality of various federal statutes and challenges to the Defense Department’s defense and early warning system. For these and other assignments, Mr. Hanify received the Justice Department’s Outstanding Performance Award.
Now, pay attention here, dear reader.
Guess which BushCo./BFEE Bank served as Trustee for the Resolution Trust Corporation?
That's right! State Street Bank & Trust, the principal subsidiary of State Street Corporation, where John D. Hanify's dad "served" as a Director.
Now, as some readers no doubt recall, the creation of the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) caused no small amount of controversy. Among the causes for outcry?
Neil Mallon Bush, just one of the white collar criminals spawned by Bush 41 and Babs, was caught up in the Savings & Loan Crisis, which "necessitated" the uppercrust bailout known as RTC. Neil Mallon Bush was a director of Silverado Savings & Loan.
(The Mallon in his name is its own sideline story: in a nutshell, it's the last name of Mr. Mallon, a man Bush 41 admired and worked for, and a man Senator Prescott Bush (R-CT) worked with, at Dresser Industries. You know? Dresser Industries? The asbestos liability nightmare that Dick Cheney bought, via Halliburton subsidiary KBR, to clear a run for W, without embarrassing mesothelioma cases popping up on the campaign trail in 2000 to haunt the Bush Family's good name during the campaign? But, like I said, that's another CorpGovActivist Campfire Tale.)
Back to today's tale:
So, on the Democratic side of the aisle, the Hanify Family has the goods on Senator Kennedy; on the Republican side of the aisle, the Hanify Family has the goods on the Kennebunkport Kleptocrats. So much for any real Federal investigations into State Street.
The Hanify Family in Boston is just like former Bush Secretary of State James Addison Baker III's Family in Austin. Just as BakerBotts protects the BFEE in Texas and other parts, (depending on the legal specialties required by the case), so too does the Hanify Family protect the BFEE in New England and other parts, (again, depending on the legal specialties required by the case). As irony would have it, Baker III's new book waxes nostalgic about his grandfather, too. Just like William Rivers Pitt does about his.
After all, when you're a Hanify or a Baker, you'll never want for bilkable hours.
*****
Interesting stuff, in its own right, to be sure. Stuff that investigative journalists - real ones, not posers - find worthy of writing about in their General Election special series. You know? The kind of hard-hitting, revelatory journalism that wins real Pulitzers?
But, by now, you must be asking yourself: what in the world does all this have to do with William Rivers Pitt?
First, let's establish one thing right off the bat: William Rivers Pitt is a Poseur. He is The Pittseur, in fact. Nor, am I alone in this sentiment, apparently.
(Of especially belly-holding, laugh-out-loud worth, as bitingly brilliant satire goes: check out the author of DummieFunnies, who has Pitt almost perfectly pegged. Whoever that blog's author is, s/he is no Poseur.)
I agree with much of what has been written at DummieFunnies and elsewhere about William Rivers Pitt: Yes, Pitt is the perennial, over-indulged, spoiled manchild. Yes, Pitt is the time-and-again tantrum thrower. Yes, Pitt is (on and on and on we could go).
Will is, after all, (say it with a melodramatic catch in your breath, as if the sheer utterance of his mere name brings you right to the edge of climax) William Rivers Pitt! You know? Scion of the - nay! THE! - Pitts (as he'll modestly tell you).
You know? The Pitt Family that - if only King George had listened to them - would've/could've singlehandedly smoothed over that nasty patch with The Colonies?
Funny, how William Rivers Pitt talks about that one side of his family (the paternal side) by name. Almost like it's an intentional omission of the maternal side.
As those who have bothered to find out know, William Rivers Pitt is the son of Charles Redding Pitt. You know? The Charles Redding Pitt who was on the legal defense team that fumbled the ball on the politically-motivated case against former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman?
You know? The Charles Redding Pitt who the Clintons could always rely on? The one that the former President appointed as a US Attorney?
(Ever wonder how William Rivers Pitt comes by some of his insider's information? Some have speculated he gets or gleans much of it from his dad.)
But then there's the other side of Will's Web: the maternal side of the family. Google the different variants of Will Pitt, William Rivers Pitt, Will Rivers Pitt, etc. - and add in the term grandfather.
As you'll see if you peruse some of those results, more than a few have speculated about who exactly is this Decent Republican Gramps Will mentions (but, curiously, it would seem, never by name).
In late 2006, I found out the answer: none other than the above-mentioned Edward B. Hanify, Esquire is Will's mysterious maternal grandfather.
How'd I find that tidbit out? William. Rivers. Pitt. I. Swear. To. God.
Will threw a Timeless Temper Tantrum, like none I had ever before seen out of him before.
In the fall of 2006, IdesOfOctober posted something on Democratic Underground, linking Edward B. Hanify to State Street and other key BFEE companies, linking Hanify to his role in the cover-up of the Pedophile Priests Scandal in Boston, and linking Hanify to his role in the cover-up of the Chappaquiddick Incident.
Mind you, the research on these connections long pre-dated any knowledge of who the hell William Rivers Pitt is, or thinks he is. Whereas his maternal grandfather, Edward B. Hanify, played a pivotal and historical role as a real Player, Will is a Poseur. A wannabe. The Pittseur.
I have no idea what it was about that particular post that drew The Pittseur's attention. But when he saw the stuff about Edward B. Hanify, he Pittched a PittFit that would've made even Hillary feel the ol' fight or flight instinct.
And, Gentle Reader, Hillary knows from Pittching a PittFit, firsthand.
(Allow me to pause here, to say a quick prayer: Oh, Dear God, please - PLEASE - let there be a picture of Hillary and Willary together, to insert here, on edit. Oh, Gentle Reader, if you know of such a photograph of Whillary, please: send it!)
PissyPitt - Be-Caped Champion of American Freedom (would you like some Fries with that?) - ranted and raved that his grandfather was the most benevolent man ever to walk the face of the Earth. He threatened to have anyone involved with this pack of lies being told about his grandfather (a.k.a., historical truths and verifiable facts regarding his grandfather) banned from Democratic Underground (with visions dancing in his head, perhaps, of calling in his family's connections - on both sides of the aisle - to get the foul perpetrators thrown into GITMO).
So much for Willary's belief in - or real respect for - free speech, the free marketplace of ideas, or historical debate. Challenged by others with real, bona fide research and investigative chops (as opposed to the sops of insider info that he's given by family members, or that he overhears them talking about when he's sitting at the kiddies' table at family gatherings), Willary went to WhineCON 1.
Oh, yes, Little Lord Fauntleroy, distaff scion of one of the lesser-known Boston Brahmin Families, was in rare form that day. Watch out! He has a riding crop and his very own pony!
The moderators of the discussion board treated the whole thing pretty even-handedly, all things considered. Realizing it hadn't been an attack on Will (how could it have been?), the mods simply "tidied up" the thread.
I mean, seriously, what were the odds that:
1. Anyone mixed up with the Hanify Hijinx would be on Democratic Underground to begin with? Let alone:
2. That they'd be a close relation of Edward B. Hanify, Esquire, the pater familias? Close enough of a relative, in fact, to:
3. Pittch a PittFit.
The odds were astronomical against all those things being true; in fact, at first it seemed like Willary was making a joke - it was simply too absurd to believe.
I mean, for real?!?
Let's review:
Willary's uncle is the founding partner of Hanify & King, which formed part of the Boston Archdiocese's defense team (to help continue the cover-up started by grandpa Hannify)?!? Hanify & King represented Bishop Daily, a top aide to Cardinal Law, at the height of the abuse scandal a few years ago.
Willary's grandfather - that Decent Republican he likes to mention so often (but never, it seems, by name) - was chief counsel to Cardinal Cushing back when the majority of the offenses and cover-ups were going on in the Boston Archdiocese?!?
And we're all supposed to believe that his grandfather, the friggin' chief counsel to the Cardinal, wasn't in on the scheme to shuttle offending priests on to other, unsuspecting parishes? Just because Willary stamps his feet, turns blue, and falls down kicking and screaming in a tantrum?
Codswallop! Any real journalist would know better. But Will isn't a real journalist. He's a Poseur.
One need only look at the annual Red Mass in Boston to see the insidious and corrupting influence some old school rock-ribbed Republican Catholic lawyers have had on the legal system there over these many decades. There they are, rubbing elbows with the likes of Justice Scalia at the Red Mass. There they are, plotting how to turn back progressive gains in the courts.
Peruse those news articles about the Red Mass and its history at your leisure, and you'll see law firms mentioned here (in this blog entry) also listed there (in those news stories of record).
No wonder this distaff family stuff is such a sore subject for Willary. Poseurdom is precarious. An inconvenient truth can bring that house of cards crashing down.
How can this Progressive Poseur reconcile the money he gives to DU, with how that money was minted?
How can this Progressive Poseur reconcile his lazy approach to investigative journalism, with whether his family members feed him insider information about past, pending, or ongoing DOJ investigations?
How can this Progressive Poseur reconcile his academic choices with the fact that his Decent Republican gramps was a College Trustee of Holy Cross, Willary's alma mater? Could Willary not get in anywhere else?
In this laughable puff piece at TruthOut, titled Boston Globe Discovers William Rivers Pitt (no, really, I swear, that's how TruthOut titled it), we learn that:
At the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Pitt majored in English literature, with a concentration in Eastern religion. In the school's conservative atmosphere he felt ''a bit like a political movement of one.'' ... This story ran on page W1 of the Globe West section on 12/19/2002.
So, let me get this straight:
1. Willary went to the school where his Decent Republican Gramps had been on the Board of Trustees.
2. Willary didn't like it there at Holy Cross, even as a legacy admission. So he set about becoming a one-man political movement, at Holy Cross.
3. Willary didn't try to - or, perhaps, succeed at - getting a transfer to another college?
4. Willary and his pals at TruthOut think that any grandson of Edward B. Hanify is discovered when the Globe writes a puff piece in Section W of the Globe West section (for suburbs west of Boston)? Um, sorry. The Hanify Family is well-known in Boston. That's like saying that Emilio Estévez was discovered by Hollywood, without anyone having the foggiest clue that his dad is Martin Sheen, or that his brother is Charlie Sheen. If Willary and his pals at TruthOut really believe that, I want some of that Boston Brahmin Ganja they're smokin'.
As for me, I have always sought out challenging academic environments, and I certainly wasn't a legacy admission, like Wee Whining Willary. As I wrote elsewhere, I even chose to forego a cushy full ride at William & Mary as one of their Monroe Scholars, in order to push myself and stretch my cultural boundaries:
I don't like surrounding myself with only like-minded folks. I like to be challenged. If "cultural more of the same" was what I was after, I would have accepted the cushy full ride to William & Mary, rather than busting my ass working up to three jobs each semester at Harvard. Stretching my cultural boundaries was important to me at 18, coming from the coal fields of West Virginia. It's important to me still at 34. [Let me reaffirm: it's important to me still at 36.]
Will's mom, another lawyer, Jane Hanify Pitt, Esquire - posting as Raven on the Democratic Underground - has posted pics of Willary and his Decent Republican Gramps. She has spoken, in glowing terms, about how her father practically raised the boy.
Leaving Willary's daddy issues well out of it, I think The Pittseur needs to realize that he's in pretty much the same boat as the one that Samuel David Cheney is in: in fact, one can foresee the Littlest Cheney insisting in a furious tantrum, someday some years hence, what a Decent Republican Gramps really was (at least, to those who knew him only through their rose-colored, pretentious glasses).
Except little Samuel David Cheney won't have the luxury - like William Rivers Pitt - of hiding the connection to his Gramps behind intentionally vague omissions of his Gramps' name. After all, Samuel David Cheney and his Granddick share the same last name.
Three Parting Lessons for today's Part I:
Parting Lesson #1. With Easter quickly approaching, perhaps certain Boston Brahmin legal eagle families (who seem to think they're untouchable, by dint of being consligiere and solicitors to both the BFEE, and to its Democratic complicitors) should consider the Curse of Christ on Cowardly, Cunning Counselors. From The Gospel of St. Luke, Chapter 11.
44: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are as graves which appear not, and the men that walk over them are not aware of them.
45: Then answered one of the lawyers, and said unto him, Master, thus saying thou reproachest us also.
46: And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.
[Like a certain spoiled trust fund brat, and his legal eagle family, have laden others with burdens grievous to be borne? Burdens like those still being borne by the pedophile priest abuse victims and their famililes, or the victims of the Resolution Trust Corporation's antics?]
47: Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.
[Or, covered up the sins of the fathers, i.e., the pedophile priests who were trusted with the title of Father, who preyed on innocent children.]
48: Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres.
[Just don't ask any legal eagle families' trust fund brats where the money came from, in order to erect all those marble monuments. Bilkable hours aren't an easy gig to break into, ya know. Christ Himself, a great Teacher even if you only view him as a secular leader, had the familial, generational issue and lawyers pegged.]
49: Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:
50: That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
51: From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.
52: Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.
[Even the intellectually-lazy grandsons of some such lawyers get in on the key of knowledge taking away and hiding act, especially when the inconvenient truths that might be uncovered would fly in the face of the grandson's gossamer tissue tales about his Decent Republican Gramps. Let's face it: form follows function. Here, the form (i.e., Willary's repeated omissions of his maternal grandfather's name) follows a very intentional function (i.e., to prevent his readers from learning more, and making up their own minds about whether Wee Whining Willary has lived up to the expectations of one to whom much was given in his trust fund.) The point of that verse goes deeper: Will entered not in to learn the truth about his grandfather's real role in History, and them that were entering in he hindered.]
53: And as he said these things unto them, the scribes and the Pharisees began to urge him vehemently, and to provoke him to speak of many things:
54: Laying wait for him, and seeking to catch something out of his mouth, that they might accuse him.
I think it is fair to say that Christ Himself drew a pretty good bead on what Boston Brahmin lawyers would be, look, and sound like, 2000 years later. To translate from the French, "the more things change, the more they stay the same." Latter-generation lawyers of legal eagle families in New Testament Jerusalem aren't really so different from latter-generation lawyers of legal eagle families in the Back Bay of Boston.
Funny, too, how the priestly hierarchies and sects of the predominant organized religion of Christ's day, age, and place (the Pharisees and the Saducees) worked hand-in-glove with the lawyers in Luke 11, against the very works of Christ Himself.
Because - and I pull no punches here - that is precisely what the priestly hierarchies in Boston did: worked hand-in-glove with their lawyers, against the very works of Christ Himself: suffer little children to come unto me.
You do not get to help design the legal strategy to shuttle pedophile priests around, and also get to go down in History without its being recorded.
You do not get to help craft the legal strategy that revictimized truthtelling victims and their families, and also get to go down in History without its being recorded. Christ Himself said suffer little children to come unto me, not cause little children to suffer (and to fear to come into my house of worship).
You do not get to escape the judgment of History, as JFK so wisely pointed out in one of the opening quotes of this blog entry.
You do not get to do these things: even if you have a tantrum-prone Poseur for a grandson, who is unwilling to see what History really teaches here.
In fact, the Bible Itself is nothing, if not an everlasting testament to how even powerful cabals and entrenched interests, working hand-in-glove with one another, cannot silence the accounts of their complicitous and duplicitous dealings. The New Testament consists of:
* The Gospels: the "good news," or, traditionally, four eyewitness accounts that included details of the conspiracists' actions to silence the troublesome rabble-rouser in their midst.
* The Acts of the Apostles: the detailed account of how the leaders of the new splinter sect - known today as Christians - worked to spread the good news far and wide, into strange lands, and among hostile audiences (including the same vested interests who worked against Christ Himself; those interests continued to keep a watchful eye on, and harrying stance toward, the new splinter sect).
* The Epistles, or The Letters: the IMs and discussion board chats of the Early Church, if you will, figuring out how to organize their splinter sect in accordance with their best approximation of what Christ Himself might have done.
* The Revelation: the view of what was gonna happen to those evildoers (like the Pharisees and Lawyers, throughout time), come Judgment Day.
No. You do not get to do these things, without its being recorded, and without it creating a splinter group that rises up to oppose it.
Parting Lesson #2. Follow the money:
* Belmont, Massachusetts, where the Hanify pater familias held court, is one of the toniest, snottiest neighborhoods in America, and is chock full of trust fund progressives, eager to tell the rest of us how we should be living our lives, running our country, and electing our officials.
Parting Lesson #3. If only: (A) Wee Whining Willary had been blessed with the looks of a leading man or a bonny boy; and (B) Willary had ever actually known the blessings of an honest day's hard work (virtually unknown to many - but by no means all - of the trust funders I've encountered), then (C) Wee Whining Willary might've tried out, convincingly, for a couple of parts that Ricky Schroeder got instead:
* Little Lord Fauntleroy, opposite Sir Alec Guinness, in the 1980 made-for-TV adaptation that caused my elementary school teacher that year to recommend that I tackle the book, since I liked the in-class showing so much. Little did she know that she thus armed me with important and valuable knowledge regarding class distinctions I would first face once I got to Harvard - where there are trust fund babies and then there are trust fund brats. Wee Whining Willary ain't the former type of trust funder.
* Silver Spoons, opposite John Houseman (as the Decent Republican Gramps to Little Ricky's manchild). Ah, yes. Wee Whining Willary is Silver Spoons, personified (with a trust fund to keep 'em polished, using someone else's elbow grease).
In conclusion: Wee Whining Willary's trust fund tripe is tolerated on DU because DU's founders benefit from his trust fund, too - without much caring about (and indeed, while they cover for) the source of those trust fund donations. If Willary doesn't care how the trust fund got all that money in it, why should they?
After all, DU's founders don't care to know about the source of Billary's secret Presidential Library donations, either.
Whining Willary well knows what Winston was on about when he said: Saving is a fine thing. Especially when your [Decent Republican] (grand)parents have done it for you.
Whining Willary doesn't even come close to measuring up to JFK's address to the Massachusetts General Court: For of those to whom much is given, much is required. And when at some future date the high court of History sits in judgment on each of us, recording whether in our brief span of service we fulfilled our responsibilities to the state, our success or failure, in whatever office we hold, will be measured by the answers to four questions: First, were we truly men of courage ... Second, were we truly men of judgment ... Third, were we truly men of integrity ... Finally, were we truly men of dedication?
(Yet, he'll regale you, ad infinitum et ad nauseam, about how important - nay! indispensable! -his entire family was to Camelot.)
Just don't mention Chappaquiddick to Wee Whining Willary - like I did, to a Kennedy campaigner in '94, who was yammering at me to Vote Kennedy, as I walked by Out of Town News in Harvard Square, of all places. Ah, 1994! That was before I knew anything about State Street, or the Hanify Hijinx, or the other corporate scandals I've mentioned here.
But I did already know - from my study of History - about Chappaquiddick.
This Kennedy campaigner, dead serious, asked, "What's a Chappaquiddick?" I kid you not. I remain as dumbstruck at the memory of it, almost, as I was in the moment itself. This guy knew about as much about the real history of Chappaquiddick as Wee Willary knows about his grandfather's true actions during it, to save Senator Kennedy from the fate that has befallen Governor Spitzer.
It takes JFK's four elements - courage, judgment, integrity, and dedication - to unravel the interplay of some of the more complex corporate cabals.
The Poseurs and The Pittseurs should get out of the way of those who actually know how to do it right, and stop hindering those of us who are seeking to enter in to the places where answers dwell. And stop hiding that key of knowledge, too, while you're at it. No need to repeat your Decent Republican Grampsies' mistakes, you little trust fund brats. Yes, get out of the way of those of us who know what we're doing, and know how to make things happen on our own merits, not our family connections.
Back to State Street: The board has been recommending votes
against a similar declassification proposal filed annually by one annoying shareholder for years. But the vote was close in 2003, and it finally passed this year, by a substantial margin.
Now the board has changed its mind. Perhaps directors are
just acting on the expressed interest of shareholders. You think?
The shareholder who pushed the issue in the first place was
Patrick Jorstad of Alexandria, Va. He is the partner of David Smith, a former employee of State Street who said he was fired six years ago after complaining that a colleague had revealed he was gay. Smith waged a one-man public relations war with State Street via his own website, demonstrating an uncanny ability to obtain internal documents and post them for embarrassing public viewing. Smith and, by extension, Jorstad, tormented State Street for years. Imagine the moment directors decided they'd have to fundamentally change the way they do business because of a movement created by Jorstad, also a former employee. I'd bet it was like chewing glass.
Board reform has been a good story for investors everywhere
this year. Big shareholders are taking their votes more seriously and getting results. There's plenty more work to do. -- Directors Feel the Heat, Boston Globe, December 23, 2004.
While The Poseurs and The Pittseurs are at it, they might also want to explore the fuller truth about how those overflowing trust funds of theirs got funded in the first place, and maybe take a good, hard, honest look into the roles their Decent Republican Grampsies really played in History. I'd even be willing to show Wee Whining Willary how real research is done. Fair warning: it requires breaking a sweat.
- Dave
*****
P.S. In one of the funnier and more revealing exchanges I ever had with Wee Whining Willary, we discussed cultural touchstones of his world (New England clambakes) and mine (Appalachian ramp festivals). At response 29, I offered to exchange tales. He replied with a response explaining the rationale for clambakes (including the prospect of his getting laid, however remote you might adjudge that to be, Gentle Reader).
In that response, he made a point to post a picture intimating that his family might be involved in Skull and Bones.
Now, I always thought that the first rule of that particular Fight Club is that Poseurs in the family don't get to know who is in Skull and Bones. Maybe Wee Whining Willary was just shadow boxing with himself, though, in his own personal fight club.
My response?
Well, it speaks for itself. Almost. One element may bear explaining. I wrote: I see your usually fear-inspiring clandestine group, and raise you a...
[this picture]
That thar is a picture of a meeting of the Molly Maguires. Posted playfully, but also to make a serious point: shove your Boston Brahmin Buddy connections and what you think those connections mean, Little Lord Fauntleroy. You're only a legend in your own mind, and far, far, far from being the greatest deed doer in your family, either side, take your pick; take away the trust fund and other $$$ you got along the way from your Decent Republican Gramps, and see how long you'd last, merely on your merits. That's a reality show I think we'd all watch.
Maybe I should've added a reference to a little song by Garth Brooks to accompany the pic of the Molly Maguires: I've Got Friends in Low Places. (But I move equally comfortably in both worlds, and just about anywhere in between. That helps explain what the Boston Globe described as my uncanny ability to obtain internal documents and post them for embarrassing public viewing. I like the company of all sorts of people, and my personal experiences, not to mention the airs of Appalachia, make it a lot easier to relate to people of all sorts, than do the rarefied airs breathed by Belmont and Beacon Hill Brahmins).
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
I think MonkeyFunk is an intellectual pygmy...
... and an embarrassing (link)
caricature (link)
of a gay man. (link)
But my heart does go out to him re: his back pain. My father suffered a real back injury (from real work, not bon bon lifting), from a coal mining accident.
Firsthand, I have seen how miserable a back injury can be. Part of me really wishes to give the DUpidMonkey some links to good medical teaching hospitals that might effectively end his pain. They have proven their ability to produce previously-unknown relief for longtime sufferers (like my dad, and like my uncle).
Another part of me says: Karma works in mysterious ways.
Roll, bounce, roll. If I had a reliable way to back-channel him, I'd send him the info, in hopes he got some relief.
- Dave
caricature (link)
of a gay man. (link)
But my heart does go out to him re: his back pain. My father suffered a real back injury (from real work, not bon bon lifting), from a coal mining accident.
Firsthand, I have seen how miserable a back injury can be. Part of me really wishes to give the DUpidMonkey some links to good medical teaching hospitals that might effectively end his pain. They have proven their ability to produce previously-unknown relief for longtime sufferers (like my dad, and like my uncle).
Another part of me says: Karma works in mysterious ways.
Roll, bounce, roll. If I had a reliable way to back-channel him, I'd send him the info, in hopes he got some relief.
- Dave
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Found the ProgressiveIndependent board, too.
For any lurking readers here who like ProgressiveIndependent.com, I've been enticed to hang out there a bit, too. I'm a progressive independent, so I have high hopes that it'll be mutually rewarding.
Chances are good I'll split time between DemocraticWarrior and PI from now on.
Happy Sunday! My original post there follows below.
- Dave
*******************************************
CorpGovActivist checking in on the PI.
Radfringe said I should come sign up here at PI and say hello.
She said that the rationality quotient here at PI was quite a bit higher than at a certain other board.
She said that I'd see some familiar names of posters long since gone (or one foot out the door) at that other board.
She said I would likely find this PI thread interesting, and have a few things to add to it, by way of facts and background.
As usual, she was right (on all counts).
:hug:
The financial and looming legal problems of that "other board" are discussed at IdesOfOctober's blog. Don't miss the January and February archives.
Key entries include:
* DUI, which discusses the revocation of that other board's business registration. If you were solicited for donations and/or gave money there after the entity's business registration was revoked, you may find that interesting.
* DUI II, which provides additional, verifiable data.
* The Three DUges, which examines the adbot revenue changes and related matters at that other board.
For my take on some of the antics there, please read (and feel free to submit any comments to) my blog. Key entries there include:
* Life As a Ghost, which was my numb first take on being tombstoned.
* I've Landed at DemocraticWarrior.com, which described my joy at finding life after tombstoning.
* Married to The MEREgistrate: (A Chicagoland-Style SOB/MOB Story, Set in the Deepest, Darkest DUngle), which made public some of my findings about that other board.
* What Is a Screen Shot, Sir?, which describes how I caught one of the most obnoxious mods on that board in a violation of the rules that required intervention from the Admins, and reveals more findings.
* Found the ProgressiveIndependent Board, Too, which catches us up with one another.
:hug:
I'll continue to tinker with my blog's features. But for now, please note the "I get by with a little help from my friends" links over to the right, including the link to the blog of the very gifted friend who enticed me to check this place out.
Please also find me online or on IM, via my profile data on the blog.
Happy Sunday! As I get my bearings here at PI, I hope to quickly move beyond carping about that other board's antics, and participate in progressive policy discussions, civil discussions about the ongoing primary season (at least on one side of the aisle), etc.
Best to all, and thanks to the site's founder(s),
- Dave
Chances are good I'll split time between DemocraticWarrior and PI from now on.
Happy Sunday! My original post there follows below.
- Dave
*******************************************
CorpGovActivist checking in on the PI.
Radfringe said I should come sign up here at PI and say hello.
She said that the rationality quotient here at PI was quite a bit higher than at a certain other board.
She said that I'd see some familiar names of posters long since gone (or one foot out the door) at that other board.
She said I would likely find this PI thread interesting, and have a few things to add to it, by way of facts and background.
As usual, she was right (on all counts).
:hug:
The financial and looming legal problems of that "other board" are discussed at IdesOfOctober's blog. Don't miss the January and February archives.
Key entries include:
* DUI, which discusses the revocation of that other board's business registration. If you were solicited for donations and/or gave money there after the entity's business registration was revoked, you may find that interesting.
* DUI II, which provides additional, verifiable data.
* The Three DUges, which examines the adbot revenue changes and related matters at that other board.
For my take on some of the antics there, please read (and feel free to submit any comments to) my blog. Key entries there include:
* Life As a Ghost, which was my numb first take on being tombstoned.
* I've Landed at DemocraticWarrior.com, which described my joy at finding life after tombstoning.
* Married to The MEREgistrate: (A Chicagoland-Style SOB/MOB Story, Set in the Deepest, Darkest DUngle), which made public some of my findings about that other board.
* What Is a Screen Shot, Sir?, which describes how I caught one of the most obnoxious mods on that board in a violation of the rules that required intervention from the Admins, and reveals more findings.
* Found the ProgressiveIndependent Board, Too, which catches us up with one another.
:hug:
I'll continue to tinker with my blog's features. But for now, please note the "I get by with a little help from my friends" links over to the right, including the link to the blog of the very gifted friend who enticed me to check this place out.
Please also find me online or on IM, via my profile data on the blog.
Happy Sunday! As I get my bearings here at PI, I hope to quickly move beyond carping about that other board's antics, and participate in progressive policy discussions, civil discussions about the ongoing primary season (at least on one side of the aisle), etc.
Best to all, and thanks to the site's founder(s),
- Dave
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
What Is A Screen Shot, Sir?
Author's Note: The below illustrates how screenshots and thread saves can play an invaluable role in catching neo-cons or neo-DLCers in action on discussion boards.
One could practically hear The MEREgistrate gulp, and his stomach churn, when he typed that question. Caught. Red-handed. Snared in his own ignorance of technology, and a very simple, very basic computer skill, at that.
Screenshotting ain't difficult.
Yes, his participation in the grief, swarm, and lock clique's activities (detailed below) became crystal clear to me on the night of January 21st.
Within 2 minutes of my posting an OP that was critical of the Clintons' ties to Abu Dhabi, there was The MEREgistrate. I've done extensive Oppo Research on the Clintons' ties to foreign donors to the Clinton Library, and - if she's the nom - I honestly believe we're in for a long, hard slog on this issue, especially in key swing states in November. Like Ohio. (Batter up, Ohio! Happy voting today in the primary! I'm up early for a reason.)
As you can see from reading down thru that thread (which I've copied, in case it suddenly disappears now), The MEREgistrate went a bit too far with his biased gaveling, making it a bit too easy to catch him in a blatant lie.
What is a screen shot, Sir?
Among my replies:
It's an objective tool, that can help with digital forensics, for instance.
He climbed down out of his high hollerin' tree, clearly unsure of himself now, and clearly chastened by the implications, making a weak attempt at humor:
You Know, Sir, That Is What A Number Of People Call Me....
An objective tool.
But I was having none of it. He had blatantly lied in one of his weaker, more inane, and more transparent attempts to grief, swarm, and lock a thread that was critical of the Clintons. I replied:
Objective, Subjective, Tomato, Tomahto
Oh, he's a pro-Clinton, pro-Shillary tool all right. But objective? Hell, no! What's worse, he's dishonest about the underlying bias in his rulings.
By contrast, when I wield a gavel in any organization to which I belong, I make sure everyone in the room knows if I have a conflict, a dog in the hunt, etc. The gavel is a trust. I have been awarded gavels. Gavels mean something important to me. The Majesty of the Law means something, too. Even today.
Upthread, I had written:
12. A Screenshot Is an Unalterable Picture of What Shows up on the Screen...
... and could help troubleshoot more than one problem.
- Dave
These were not technical difficulties, folks. This was outright judicial misconduct. I've seen it before, from gavel-wielders great and small. And I know that carefully-collected evidence is the best, tried, and true cure.
13. There Is No Problem, Sir
That is what activating your link shows me.
Horsecrap. Won't take a screenshot to show us all? We're obliged to take his word for it? The Great Oz has spoken.
14. Neither the Original Link nor the Tightened One Shows That up on My End...
... anywhere near the top.
- Dave
In other words, he cherry-picked the most off-topic result he could find on short notice, and tried to use that to twist the meaning of the OP to grief, swarm, and lock it. Caught red-handed at it, and unaware of the possibility that someone besides the all-powerful Mods and Admins might have tech tools, he invoked his already-threadbare personal credibility.
Upthread, he also admits:
4. Then You Have Come To The Wrong Person, Sir
My electronic illiteracy is legend....
There's probably some truth to that blind spot of his, though I suspect he's overblowing it.
Still. Enough e-lliteracy to catch him, red-handed, participating in the histrionic grief, swarm, and lock clique's activities that very important night.
Coming to him for unbiased gavel-wielding amounts to coming to the wrong person, too, Sir, to speak in the vernacular of that oracular.
Once he knew that there was actual evidence to produce to the Admins, he slinked off.
Once other onlookers realized I'd bested him and that he had practically run with arms flailing from the field, they began to address the originally-intended point of the OP.
Upthread, when I had offered to provide the actual proof for others to see his lie, he'd replied:
If You Say So, Sir
I am taking a pork roast out of the oven, and will be otherwise occupied for a while.
I replied:
19. I Say So, and I Copied and Pasted Accurately
No apology was forthcoming. The MEREgistrate doesn't do apologies.
Instead, he hightails it back to the mod hot tub to conspire with his disciples, taking counsel one with each other as to how to deal with the troubling truthteller, who will not fall in line behind the Clintons in the primaries.
Even when there are screenshots of his judicial misconduct, apparently, The MEREgistrate does not feel compelled to apologize from the bench.
Early the next morning, I was surprised to discover myself TS'ed.
Ah, well. Can't fight City Hall after all. After all, The MEREgistrate regales everyone about Chicagoland justice. (With a little too much familiar admiration for the stories of the corrupt courts there, it seems, at least for my taste.)
Maybe it was my best wishes for his culinary enjoyment, after he'd fled the field of debate, that did the deed:
But I Do Hope the Pork Roast Was Fine n/t
Or maybe it was the indigestion he got from having his antics caught that made the pork roast go down like saw dust.
Enyhoo, screen shots and thread saves are a magnificent way to memorialize evidence of the grief, swarm, and lock clique's antics, which will - no doubt - become increasingly bizarre as Senator Clinton continues to lose. They'll be in rare form tonight as results come in from OH, RI, TX, and VT. Mark my words.
Oh? And that first TS'ing, which shocked the hell out of me?
For the record...
At 10:18 a.m. ET on the morning of the 22nd, I sent the following e-mail to mail@youknowwhere.
Skinner -
At your convenience, could you specify whether there is a way for me to retrieve my journal entries?
Thank you, and best wishes to DU throughout 2008.
Sincerely,
- Dave
Let the record reflect that I most certainly DID NOT request reinstatement. I have enough self-respect, and - at that time, still, at least - enough respect for Skinner's efforts to found DU, that I thought:
Well. They give poor guidance to the users, and apparently, to the mods, as well. They apparently cannot tolerate having a real, experienced Parliamentarian or real, experienced gavel-wielder in their midst, especially right now, when their pro-Clinton antics are becoming this shrill and this transparent. I guess I no longer fit with their Prime Directive there.
For my journal entries? I wasn't too proud to beg.
For reinstatement? I was willing to just let the matter lie within their own judgment. Their house. Their rules. Their loss.
No. There was no begging for reinstatement.
At high noon, EarlG replied:
Hello Dave,
I have reinstated your account. We reviewed the situation and decided that the moderators acted precipitously. My apologies for the inconvenience.
It has come to our attention that you may be using two accounts on DU: CorpGovActivist and IdesOfOctober. Members are only permitted to use one account. Please let me know which one you would like to use.
Regards,
EG (DU Admin)
No apology for the activities of The MEREgistrate, either from him or from his superiors.
The only apology here was the apology that the mods had done 'n gone made the clique's existence so, so obvious, giving rise to a hue and cry that went up on the board.
And, to make matters worse for the Admins, I didn't file a motion for reinstatement, but rather, for the transcript (my journal entries).
If the Admin Appellate Court was going to remedy this lower court's gross injustice, it was gonna hafta do so sua sponte. I wasn't about to file the motion for an appeal, so that they could say they acted on such a request.
As a sop to the clique, swarm, and lock clique, though, the Appellate Court trotted out the ol' sockpuppet chestnut.
I replied:
Earl -
Thank you for reinstating my account.
Ides is a different person. He is often nearby, as I am quite sick and almost housebound with my Crohn's.
- Dave
Not something I particularly wanted to reveal. But I was, after all, in chambers (so to speak) with an Appeals Court judge.
Funnily enough, they TS'ed Ides anyway.
A number of e-mails came in decrying my TS'ing. I demurred on explaining what had happened, out of respect for the Appellate Court and its possible published opinion. It never came.
Typically, in real courts, when there is a reversal of a lower court, guidance is handed down, with a published opinion - to the benefit of all involved.
But kangaroo courts don't care about such niceties and formalities.
At 12:40 p.m. ET, I sent this to EarlG:
Earl -
The pro-Clinton bias and completely provable - objectively, provable - rush by The Magistrate that led to his getting caught red-handed in a lie last night requires an apology.
Publicly. He is unfit to be a mod. He is a kangaroo courtroom judge with a badge and a gavel.
- Dave
P.S. I have [redacted poster's gravedancing]* thread forwarded to me, too.
Oh, but don't take my word for it.
The MEREgistrate exults in his power in the strangest places.
As things began to heat up in anticipation of Iowa, NanceGreggs (bless her) started a marvelous gem of an OP: DU Goes to the Movies.
The MEREgistrate had three responses in that light-hearted thread of hers, with that serious point of hers (again, I say, bless her).
All three of his responses in her thread give insights into his skewed mindset of what wielding a gavel or a badge is all about.
But one is especially revealing.
One poster replied to the OP:
16. For the mods: "Badges? Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges!"
From "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre".
The MEREgistrate replied:
True Enough, Sir
We have grey ghosts, and a hot tub....
The grey ghosts are a reference to the mods' badges. Blue ghosts are Admins. Some are one and the same. But to preserve the seeming sanctity of the blue ghost...
... Enyhoo, nevermind the British spelling of gray as grey. An Anglophile like me picks up on stuff like that.
Apropos of nothing, isn't EarlG, David Allsopp, from the UK?
EarlG wrote back, in response to my indictment of The Magistrate as "a kangaroo courtroom judge with a badge and a gavel." His response came at 3:28 p.m. ET:
For the record, the moderators act by consensus. The decision to ban you was made by a group of six moderators. The Magistrate was not the moderator who deactivated your account, nor was he part of the final discussion.
Corporate boards act by consensus, too. I can point Messrs. Allen, Allsopp, and Leitner to a great deal of scholarly literature about how one single, strong personality (e.g., the CEO, The MEREgistrate) can skew consensus decision-making by board members eager to keep their board seats and the accompanying perks.
And that word, final, suggests, implicitly, that The MEREgistrate really disliked being bested on a field where the other party actually had enough tools to fight scrappy. He was in on the preliminary discussion, with a fig leaf of faux recusal from the final decision.
In other words: he led them by the nose, then made a show of leaving the room. Weak-minded mods (but not all of them, as it turns out.)
EarlG/David Allsopp continued:
A lot of people are posting a lot of flamebait right now,
Let's stop this right here, right now. Real courts have rules. Those rules have definitions. Those Definitions apply equally.
The Admins have employed - poorly - a very subjective, "we know it when we see it," Scalia-esque court system. Sorry, but I've seen real courts in action. This ain't even close.
What is "flamebait"?
but you have
been one of the worst offenders. You were warned about this two weeks
ago and your behavior improved for a while, but deteriorated again over
the past day or so. The decision to ban you was based on that fact.
No, it was based on the exchange with The MEREgistrate the prior night during the debate.
And if "flamebait" means I posted thought-provoking threads, designed to get open-minded progressives thinking out a few steps in the future, thinking strategically about how to win in the fall, thinking strategically about how to take on McCain or any other nominee the GOP might substitute, then, yeah: I did.
But instead of hosing down the flamers, and the protected-status, pro-Clinton grief, swarm, and lock clique, the Admins and Mods have taken the view that a thread that might spark actual discussion that could be conducted in a civil manner (Exhibit A: DemocraticWarrior.com) should be locked as flamebait.
When Admin reviewed the situation today we decided to reactivate your account because we haven't specifically given moderators the go-ahead to ban people purely because they post a lot of flamebait. However, you should be aware that there is a limit to what we will tolerate.
*shrug* Don't do me any favors, pal. I only asked for my journal entries. If I'm stinking up the place with factual posts about inconvenient or sore subjects like the Clinton Library donors, let's have a nice, civil, friendly split. I just want my journal entries. You can keep the house.
[redacted poster's gravedancing] thread was permitted because it is not against the rules to attack people who aren't members of DU, which you weren't at the time. As soon as I reinstated you, I deleted the thread.
Regards,
EG (DU Admin)
What a happy horsecrap technicality that is! For the approximate two hours that I was TSed, it was OK to savage me?
One thing about that very cool post of NanceGreggs': I finally found out what The Lounge was for.
“We’ll always have *STRIKETHRUParis* the Lounge.”
(Rick Blaine – “Casablanca”)
I didn't join DU to hang out in The Lounge, but - until the primaries blew over, I thought maybe I should just belly up to the bar there.
Immediately after learning of my Lazarus rebound, I posted at 12:08 p.m. ET:
My Sincere and Fondest Wishes to DU throughout 2008
Thank you all for helping to pass many housebound hours in lively debate and discussion.
I will continue to read many of you with great joy, sometimes great irritation, but always with great affection.
- Dave
Shortly after that, they repurposed GDP.
Cool! I thought. Hit hard on the field. Shake hands off the field. Have a beer at the nearest pub afterwards, even with foes from the field. No longer just confined to The Lounge or the sidelines. Get back in there and mix it up some.
That philosophy has worked well in many arenas, both real ones (like baseball, soccer, or lacrosse), and metaphorical ones (like courtrooms).
Soon after, The MEREgistrate griefed another thread of mine, I complained*, and the Admins apparently sidelined him. Details on my blog.
The grief, swarm, and lock clique couldn't stand it, and I now no longer believe that the Admins were anything but complicit in their activities.
But to drive home the point of this thread: as you watch the fouls on the field that are sure to take place today (given what's at stake, the grief, swarm, and lock clique have probably made playbooks), just remember: screenshots and thread saves can capture the true play-by-play.
; )
- Dave
One could practically hear The MEREgistrate gulp, and his stomach churn, when he typed that question. Caught. Red-handed. Snared in his own ignorance of technology, and a very simple, very basic computer skill, at that.
Screenshotting ain't difficult.
Yes, his participation in the grief, swarm, and lock clique's activities (detailed below) became crystal clear to me on the night of January 21st.
Within 2 minutes of my posting an OP that was critical of the Clintons' ties to Abu Dhabi, there was The MEREgistrate. I've done extensive Oppo Research on the Clintons' ties to foreign donors to the Clinton Library, and - if she's the nom - I honestly believe we're in for a long, hard slog on this issue, especially in key swing states in November. Like Ohio. (Batter up, Ohio! Happy voting today in the primary! I'm up early for a reason.)
As you can see from reading down thru that thread (which I've copied, in case it suddenly disappears now), The MEREgistrate went a bit too far with his biased gaveling, making it a bit too easy to catch him in a blatant lie.
What is a screen shot, Sir?
Among my replies:
It's an objective tool, that can help with digital forensics, for instance.
He climbed down out of his high hollerin' tree, clearly unsure of himself now, and clearly chastened by the implications, making a weak attempt at humor:
You Know, Sir, That Is What A Number Of People Call Me....
An objective tool.
But I was having none of it. He had blatantly lied in one of his weaker, more inane, and more transparent attempts to grief, swarm, and lock a thread that was critical of the Clintons. I replied:
Objective, Subjective, Tomato, Tomahto
Oh, he's a pro-Clinton, pro-Shillary tool all right. But objective? Hell, no! What's worse, he's dishonest about the underlying bias in his rulings.
By contrast, when I wield a gavel in any organization to which I belong, I make sure everyone in the room knows if I have a conflict, a dog in the hunt, etc. The gavel is a trust. I have been awarded gavels. Gavels mean something important to me. The Majesty of the Law means something, too. Even today.
Upthread, I had written:
12. A Screenshot Is an Unalterable Picture of What Shows up on the Screen...
... and could help troubleshoot more than one problem.
- Dave
These were not technical difficulties, folks. This was outright judicial misconduct. I've seen it before, from gavel-wielders great and small. And I know that carefully-collected evidence is the best, tried, and true cure.
13. There Is No Problem, Sir
That is what activating your link shows me.
Horsecrap. Won't take a screenshot to show us all? We're obliged to take his word for it? The Great Oz has spoken.
14. Neither the Original Link nor the Tightened One Shows That up on My End...
... anywhere near the top.
- Dave
In other words, he cherry-picked the most off-topic result he could find on short notice, and tried to use that to twist the meaning of the OP to grief, swarm, and lock it. Caught red-handed at it, and unaware of the possibility that someone besides the all-powerful Mods and Admins might have tech tools, he invoked his already-threadbare personal credibility.
Upthread, he also admits:
4. Then You Have Come To The Wrong Person, Sir
My electronic illiteracy is legend....
There's probably some truth to that blind spot of his, though I suspect he's overblowing it.
Still. Enough e-lliteracy to catch him, red-handed, participating in the histrionic grief, swarm, and lock clique's activities that very important night.
Coming to him for unbiased gavel-wielding amounts to coming to the wrong person, too, Sir, to speak in the vernacular of that oracular.
Once he knew that there was actual evidence to produce to the Admins, he slinked off.
Once other onlookers realized I'd bested him and that he had practically run with arms flailing from the field, they began to address the originally-intended point of the OP.
Upthread, when I had offered to provide the actual proof for others to see his lie, he'd replied:
If You Say So, Sir
I am taking a pork roast out of the oven, and will be otherwise occupied for a while.
I replied:
19. I Say So, and I Copied and Pasted Accurately
No apology was forthcoming. The MEREgistrate doesn't do apologies.
Instead, he hightails it back to the mod hot tub to conspire with his disciples, taking counsel one with each other as to how to deal with the troubling truthteller, who will not fall in line behind the Clintons in the primaries.
Even when there are screenshots of his judicial misconduct, apparently, The MEREgistrate does not feel compelled to apologize from the bench.
Early the next morning, I was surprised to discover myself TS'ed.
Ah, well. Can't fight City Hall after all. After all, The MEREgistrate regales everyone about Chicagoland justice. (With a little too much familiar admiration for the stories of the corrupt courts there, it seems, at least for my taste.)
Maybe it was my best wishes for his culinary enjoyment, after he'd fled the field of debate, that did the deed:
But I Do Hope the Pork Roast Was Fine n/t
Or maybe it was the indigestion he got from having his antics caught that made the pork roast go down like saw dust.
Enyhoo, screen shots and thread saves are a magnificent way to memorialize evidence of the grief, swarm, and lock clique's antics, which will - no doubt - become increasingly bizarre as Senator Clinton continues to lose. They'll be in rare form tonight as results come in from OH, RI, TX, and VT. Mark my words.
Oh? And that first TS'ing, which shocked the hell out of me?
For the record...
At 10:18 a.m. ET on the morning of the 22nd, I sent the following e-mail to mail@youknowwhere.
Skinner -
At your convenience, could you specify whether there is a way for me to retrieve my journal entries?
Thank you, and best wishes to DU throughout 2008.
Sincerely,
- Dave
Let the record reflect that I most certainly DID NOT request reinstatement. I have enough self-respect, and - at that time, still, at least - enough respect for Skinner's efforts to found DU, that I thought:
Well. They give poor guidance to the users, and apparently, to the mods, as well. They apparently cannot tolerate having a real, experienced Parliamentarian or real, experienced gavel-wielder in their midst, especially right now, when their pro-Clinton antics are becoming this shrill and this transparent. I guess I no longer fit with their Prime Directive there.
For my journal entries? I wasn't too proud to beg.
For reinstatement? I was willing to just let the matter lie within their own judgment. Their house. Their rules. Their loss.
No. There was no begging for reinstatement.
At high noon, EarlG replied:
Hello Dave,
I have reinstated your account. We reviewed the situation and decided that the moderators acted precipitously. My apologies for the inconvenience.
It has come to our attention that you may be using two accounts on DU: CorpGovActivist and IdesOfOctober. Members are only permitted to use one account. Please let me know which one you would like to use.
Regards,
EG (DU Admin)
No apology for the activities of The MEREgistrate, either from him or from his superiors.
The only apology here was the apology that the mods had done 'n gone made the clique's existence so, so obvious, giving rise to a hue and cry that went up on the board.
And, to make matters worse for the Admins, I didn't file a motion for reinstatement, but rather, for the transcript (my journal entries).
If the Admin Appellate Court was going to remedy this lower court's gross injustice, it was gonna hafta do so sua sponte. I wasn't about to file the motion for an appeal, so that they could say they acted on such a request.
As a sop to the clique, swarm, and lock clique, though, the Appellate Court trotted out the ol' sockpuppet chestnut.
I replied:
Earl -
Thank you for reinstating my account.
Ides is a different person. He is often nearby, as I am quite sick and almost housebound with my Crohn's.
- Dave
Not something I particularly wanted to reveal. But I was, after all, in chambers (so to speak) with an Appeals Court judge.
Funnily enough, they TS'ed Ides anyway.
A number of e-mails came in decrying my TS'ing. I demurred on explaining what had happened, out of respect for the Appellate Court and its possible published opinion. It never came.
Typically, in real courts, when there is a reversal of a lower court, guidance is handed down, with a published opinion - to the benefit of all involved.
But kangaroo courts don't care about such niceties and formalities.
At 12:40 p.m. ET, I sent this to EarlG:
Earl -
The pro-Clinton bias and completely provable - objectively, provable - rush by The Magistrate that led to his getting caught red-handed in a lie last night requires an apology.
Publicly. He is unfit to be a mod. He is a kangaroo courtroom judge with a badge and a gavel.
- Dave
P.S. I have [redacted poster's gravedancing]* thread forwarded to me, too.
Oh, but don't take my word for it.
The MEREgistrate exults in his power in the strangest places.
As things began to heat up in anticipation of Iowa, NanceGreggs (bless her) started a marvelous gem of an OP: DU Goes to the Movies.
The MEREgistrate had three responses in that light-hearted thread of hers, with that serious point of hers (again, I say, bless her).
All three of his responses in her thread give insights into his skewed mindset of what wielding a gavel or a badge is all about.
But one is especially revealing.
One poster replied to the OP:
16. For the mods: "Badges? Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges!"
From "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre".
The MEREgistrate replied:
True Enough, Sir
We have grey ghosts, and a hot tub....
The grey ghosts are a reference to the mods' badges. Blue ghosts are Admins. Some are one and the same. But to preserve the seeming sanctity of the blue ghost...
... Enyhoo, nevermind the British spelling of gray as grey. An Anglophile like me picks up on stuff like that.
Apropos of nothing, isn't EarlG, David Allsopp, from the UK?
EarlG wrote back, in response to my indictment of The Magistrate as "a kangaroo courtroom judge with a badge and a gavel." His response came at 3:28 p.m. ET:
For the record, the moderators act by consensus. The decision to ban you was made by a group of six moderators. The Magistrate was not the moderator who deactivated your account, nor was he part of the final discussion.
Corporate boards act by consensus, too. I can point Messrs. Allen, Allsopp, and Leitner to a great deal of scholarly literature about how one single, strong personality (e.g., the CEO, The MEREgistrate) can skew consensus decision-making by board members eager to keep their board seats and the accompanying perks.
And that word, final, suggests, implicitly, that The MEREgistrate really disliked being bested on a field where the other party actually had enough tools to fight scrappy. He was in on the preliminary discussion, with a fig leaf of faux recusal from the final decision.
In other words: he led them by the nose, then made a show of leaving the room. Weak-minded mods (but not all of them, as it turns out.)
EarlG/David Allsopp continued:
A lot of people are posting a lot of flamebait right now,
Let's stop this right here, right now. Real courts have rules. Those rules have definitions. Those Definitions apply equally.
The Admins have employed - poorly - a very subjective, "we know it when we see it," Scalia-esque court system. Sorry, but I've seen real courts in action. This ain't even close.
What is "flamebait"?
but you have
been one of the worst offenders. You were warned about this two weeks
ago and your behavior improved for a while, but deteriorated again over
the past day or so. The decision to ban you was based on that fact.
No, it was based on the exchange with The MEREgistrate the prior night during the debate.
And if "flamebait" means I posted thought-provoking threads, designed to get open-minded progressives thinking out a few steps in the future, thinking strategically about how to win in the fall, thinking strategically about how to take on McCain or any other nominee the GOP might substitute, then, yeah: I did.
But instead of hosing down the flamers, and the protected-status, pro-Clinton grief, swarm, and lock clique, the Admins and Mods have taken the view that a thread that might spark actual discussion that could be conducted in a civil manner (Exhibit A: DemocraticWarrior.com) should be locked as flamebait.
When Admin reviewed the situation today we decided to reactivate your account because we haven't specifically given moderators the go-ahead to ban people purely because they post a lot of flamebait. However, you should be aware that there is a limit to what we will tolerate.
*shrug* Don't do me any favors, pal. I only asked for my journal entries. If I'm stinking up the place with factual posts about inconvenient or sore subjects like the Clinton Library donors, let's have a nice, civil, friendly split. I just want my journal entries. You can keep the house.
[redacted poster's gravedancing] thread was permitted because it is not against the rules to attack people who aren't members of DU, which you weren't at the time. As soon as I reinstated you, I deleted the thread.
Regards,
EG (DU Admin)
What a happy horsecrap technicality that is! For the approximate two hours that I was TSed, it was OK to savage me?
One thing about that very cool post of NanceGreggs': I finally found out what The Lounge was for.
“We’ll always have *STRIKETHRUParis* the Lounge.”
(Rick Blaine – “Casablanca”)
I didn't join DU to hang out in The Lounge, but - until the primaries blew over, I thought maybe I should just belly up to the bar there.
Immediately after learning of my Lazarus rebound, I posted at 12:08 p.m. ET:
My Sincere and Fondest Wishes to DU throughout 2008
Thank you all for helping to pass many housebound hours in lively debate and discussion.
I will continue to read many of you with great joy, sometimes great irritation, but always with great affection.
- Dave
Shortly after that, they repurposed GDP.
Cool! I thought. Hit hard on the field. Shake hands off the field. Have a beer at the nearest pub afterwards, even with foes from the field. No longer just confined to The Lounge or the sidelines. Get back in there and mix it up some.
That philosophy has worked well in many arenas, both real ones (like baseball, soccer, or lacrosse), and metaphorical ones (like courtrooms).
Soon after, The MEREgistrate griefed another thread of mine, I complained*, and the Admins apparently sidelined him. Details on my blog.
The grief, swarm, and lock clique couldn't stand it, and I now no longer believe that the Admins were anything but complicit in their activities.
But to drive home the point of this thread: as you watch the fouls on the field that are sure to take place today (given what's at stake, the grief, swarm, and lock clique have probably made playbooks), just remember: screenshots and thread saves can capture the true play-by-play.
; )
- Dave
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
